Jump to content

smallspy

CPTDB Wiki Editor
  • Posts

    10,365
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Toronto, Ont.

Recent Profile Visitors

19,440 profile views

smallspy's Achievements

  1. No arguements here from any of those points. And again....no arguments. You're confusing two different sets of rules. Queensway intersections are 7km/h. The rule for specialwork is that it must be traversed at no more than 10km/h. That's why they installed those blue indicators on the dashboards of the CLRVs and ALRVs. I seem to recall that there was also a rule that only one car can enter an intersection, but I also can't recall if they rescinded that one. Dan
  2. As I've written elsewhere, largely the TTC's own knee-jerk reactions to incidents. Like the one at Fleet Loop. Or the one at Queens Quay and Spadina. Or the other one at Queens Quay and Spadina. And the one at Queen and Spadina. The TTC has used each of these incidents - and likely others that I can't recall at this moment - to institute rules that have in the long run hampered streetcar operations. Like stopping before every single facing-point switch to ensure that it is pointed in the right direction. Or operating at only 10km/h over all specialwork. Or operating at only 7km/h over all intersections on the Queensway. Keep in mind too that flange-bearing streetcar trackwork on the TTC was used in some places in the 1960s and into the 1970s, and they didn't need any slow orders to operate over them then. Dan
  3. I need to circle back onto this point..... Riding on the flange of the wheel does absolutely nothing to the likelihood of a derailment. If it did, flange-bearing trackwork wouldn't exist. While it does is alter the point of contact between the rail and wheel interface, it still (in concert with the solid axles on the equipment) provides more than enough security against derailment. It's no less safe than a traditional diamond, where one of the two wheels completely loses contact with the rail for a brief moment. Dan
  4. It's not Metrolinx's facility to charge fees to. That said, DavidH's answer is the correct one. Dan
  5. Considering the level of service that the route is providing, it's pretty obvious why extending any of the 29 branches wasn't done. Dan
  6. Other than a couple of meters around Smiths Falls, it will be the first scheduled service, yes. CN and VIA passenger trains have used the Belleville Sub for detours, however. Dan
  7. If I remember the station layout correctly.... That's the east end emergency exit stairwell. It exits into the bus driveway, underneath the entrance hallway on the north side of Sheppard. Dan
  8. It looks like he's referring to the smooth, poured concrete wall on the left (track) side versus the concrete block wall on the right. The concrete block wall is used to block off the "excess" length of the station box that was built but is not being used. This was done at all of the stations along the Sheppard Line - and in general construction, concrete block is used when you need to build a wall or enclosure that isn't structural. If/when the line gets modified to use 6-car trains, the concrete block walls at all of the stations will be knocked out, and platform finishes extended into those areas. Dan
  9. Cool, so there's one. In the three years that there's been track on the surface alignment so far. This doesn't strike me as something that is worth fretting over that much, at least not as yet. Dan
  10. I haven't heard of a single incident of a driver ending up on the tracks on Eglinton yet - and certainly, there's been nothing in the papers, which seems peculiar considering how quick they generally are to report on these kinds of things. How many have there been? Dan
  11. I'm not so sure that Metrolinx is doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. As I understand the contract is written, the TTC needs to pay for the use of the vehicles and the line based on the service level. Reduced frequencies means more vehicles, which means higher costs. And considering that as new there should be virtually no major maintenance needed to be performed - which is what those payments are supposed to help cover - Metrolinx would pocket the difference. Yes, the TTC is currently undergoing a funding crunch, but they certainly aren't the only ones, either. Dan
  12. Oh, the fare issue is absolutely something that will need to be dealt with. But that's also a bit of putting the cart before the horse, no? The line to Highway 7 hasn't even been started yet, nevermind further north. Dan
  13. Since it doesn't seem to be clear to most people.... A very large proportion - possibily even a majority - of people getting on at Finch Station today are not taking the subway all the way downtown. And this would also extend to any extensions further north. While some may take the trip all the way to Queen or King, most of them will be getting off far upstream of those stations. Dan
  14. For a while there, the TTC was publishing monthly MTBF data in the CEO's reports. Other than that, historically, no, there's never been any data released - at least not that I have been able to dig up. Dan
  15. I'm sure that more CLRVs were thought about at the time, but I've never seen any hard reference to it. In fact thinking about it, there must have been additional options not taken for the Scarborough and Etobicoke LRT systems. By the time the ALRVs were in the picture - and remember, they started design work on the articulated version almost in parallel with the CLRV - they were only going to be buying ALRVs, but to replace the PCCs then still in service. The original plan was for 75, which eventually got whittled down to 52. Dan
×
×
  • Create New...